Thanks. When you have the time take a look at my suggestion how Zeno's paradox is resolved.

In your matter time universe, what does a line consist of and how would you cut a line?

Akinbo

Dear Dr. Agnew,

Either you or abstract we wrote: "It is not clear to me why you like to overuse the word abstract. Your stories sound like gibberish, not truthfulness. I am sorry that you or abstract we could not understand my comment, and for some inexplicable reason you or abstract we thought that it was an audible recitation of stories. Could it be that you and abstract we actually do not know what reality is?

Patiently,

Joe Fisher

It is a pity that instead of using your eyes to read my comment, you, or abstract we chose to try to listen to it!

Impressed,

Joe Fisher

A line presupposes Cartesian space and its lonely empty nothing. Just saying a line presupposes a large number of implicit axioms.

Begin with objects. Can you divide an object? Yes, until you get to the quark.

Time...can you divide time? Only into the tick of a clock.

Action...can you divide an action? You can divide an action only until you reach an equal action.

Lines are only what we imagine reality to be, not what it actually is. Reality consists of objects made of matter subject to action over time.

Dear Dr. Agnew,

There is no empty space. All of the stars are held in place by stellar radiation. All of the planets are held in place by atmospheric accumulation. The real Universe is indivisible.

I see. Thanks for the clarification. I like the picture of a superposition of neural packets for the primitive brain, with involved survival functions, and the singular packet for the moments of thought. I only regret that, apparently, we are currently still unable to use superposition also for conscious moments of thought; maybe this is the next step in the evolution of our species (but this is more related to the topic of last year's Contest...)

I believe that there are ways that we can access the superposition states of our primitive mind with conscious thought. For example, meditation and dreams and hypnosis are all altered states of conscious thought that access those superposition states of our primitive mind.

Motor action only needs our primitive mind, but then that action is limited to survival. The singularity of our conscious mind is what gives up purpose beyond survival and the singular nature of purpose is a part of consciousness.

I am especially enamored of the delta wave mode at 1.7 Hz of the EEG spectrum of thought, which is the mode of meditation and sleep and the primitive mind. While the alpha mode at 11 Hz comes and goes and is associated with conscious thought as well as dreams, the delta mode seems to be always present and delta is the only resonance left with deep sleep or meditation.

Although science does not yet understand the natures of these neural resonances, it is very tempting to think of neural resonances as quantum modes of a bilateral neural packet of a moment of thought.

Actually, I do agree that there is no space, empty or otherwise. When you say there is no empty space, you implicitly accept the existence of space in the first place.

It is the exchange of matter between objects that binds the universe together and stellar radiation is an exchange of matter with the universe as an object.

Gravity is what holds all of the planets and stars and galaxies in place in the universe and it is the action of gravity that is still somewhat mysterious. It would appear that gravity force is due to the pairs of photons emitted as quadrupoles as a result of the binding of charge force dipoles within an object.

The real universe is an object made up of matter particles that combine in lots of interesting ways to make hydrogen and people and a lot of other stuff. As a result, the universe is simply the way that it is.

You have presented a good work, with the foundational questions of "Object", "Time" and "matter" which throws a daring views.

Best Regards,

Miss. Sujatha Jagannathan

It is not really the number 17 degrees as a galaxy pitch angle so much as it is the tangent of 17 degrees, which is the ratio of galaxy winding energy to its gravitational energy, 30%. Why that ratio is tied to the golden ratio through the Fibanacci series does seem a bit mysterious, though.

Tangent of 17 degrees approx equal to 1/3

See my http://vixra.org/abs/0907.0008

Is Ratio 3:1 a Comprehensive Principle of the Universe?

Steve,

I take walks in my head all the time.

BTW, the series that you list is simply the most commonly known. It was featured in the Da Vinci Code. There are others also. You simply pick two numbers and start to add.

The golden ratio is a favorite of mine. I suspect that it is actually the source of some of your observations rather than the Fibonacci series. I that really a face that I see in the cloud or does it just look like a face? Those galaxies definitely respond to physics though.

All in all, an enjoyable read. Thanks.

Best Regards and Good Luck,

Gary Simpson

    Dear Sir,

    Your essay has lot of potential for development into many branches. In ancient India, year was named with a base of sixty called Jupiterian cycle, which is followed even today. The base comes from the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn on the same straight line drawn from Earth, which happens every sixty years.

    The simplest answer to Zeno's paradox is that velocity is related to the mass of the body that is moving, the energy used (force applied) to move it and the total density of and the totality of the energy operating on the field. These are all mobile units against the back drop of the field that is static with reference to these. Middle of the distance is related to the frame of reference, which is static, while the other aspects are relatively mobile. Thus, it is like comparing position and momentum. They do not commute. Hence there is no paradox, which is borne out of experience. While the middle of the distance is gradually reduced, the velocity is not reduced by the same proportion. Hence the runner will reach the end point. These two aspects represent the first two digits of the Fibonacci sequence invented by the 8th century Indian mathematician Mahavira. The rest are the interactions. The same is true for life. One sperm fertilizes one egg and their interaction drawing from the environment grows. The same applies to other fields also.

    You have correctly stated that: "We believe in objects because of their qualia". But "mathematics is how we use reason to describe of the qualia of objects" can be misleading. Mathematics describes quantitative aspect of Nature, while physics describes the qualia. For example, color is differentiated by wave length of the light emitted by it. If we add blue to yellow, it becomes parrot green. But if you add or subtract the wavelengths, it will not match. We have discussed these aspects as well as space, time, relativity, equivalence and complex numbers etc., in detail in our essay.

    Language is the transposition of information to another system's CPU or mind by signals or sounds using energy (self communication is perception). The transposition may relate to a fixed object/information. It can be used in different domains and different contexts or require modifications in prescribed manner depending upon the context. Since mathematics follows these rules, it is also a language. Mathematics explains only how much one quantity, whether scalar or vector; accumulate or reduce linearly or non-linearly in interactions involving similar or partly similar quantities and not what, why, when, where, or with whom about the objects. These are subject matters of physics. The interactions are chemistry.

    Regards,

    basudeba

      5 days later

      In this epoch, yes. However, different epochs have different forces and so the answer depends on the epoch...I think...

      You may be right and the golden ratio may be the source. But the Fibonacci series is a simple growth by addition from a finite beginning and that is very appealing. The golden ratio is simply a nice symmetry...

      5 days later

      Language is a way to tell stories to other people. Mathematics is definitely limited as a language for quantitative reasoning, just as you say.

      The spectra of mathematics can describe qualia, but in a different sense than the words of language. For example, blue and yellow are both colors that we commonly see in reflected light because of absorption by pigments. The math of those absorption spectra is straightforward and so math can represent colors with spectra as long as a white spectrum of light from a source illuminates the object. So I still argue that math can add and subtract blue and yellow absorption spectra and math can fully represent the parrot green spectrum in reflected light given a white light source illuminating an object.

      However, the word "blue" also communicates more than the spectrum that math calls blue. The word "blue" communicates a lifetime of both singular and shared relational experiences with blue objects and so the word "blue" describes a blue object in relational ways far beyond what a math spectrum represents.

      17 days later

      Dear Stephen F. Agnew

      Our ideas nearly coincide. You say, "Mathematics expresses the relationships between the matter and time of objects and an action principle. Science uses math to represent action as motion in space but all motion is equally well a displacement of an object in time".

      My view: Any 'change' in the physical world happens 'by way of motion'; there are no other ways. And, 'motion' is a space- time relation that follows 'mathematical laws'. So all changes in the world follows 'mathematical laws'. The physical world has no 'laws' of its own; it has only some basic 'properties'. Mathematics decides the 'laws', and that is the only role of mathematics in the domain of physics. Please read my essay: A physicalist interpretation of the relation between Physics and Mathematics

        16 days later

        Dear Dr. Agnew,

        I thought that your engrossing essay was exceptionally well written and I do hope that it fares well in the competition.

        I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was wrong about the explosive capability of NOTHING.

        All I ask is that you give my essay WHY THE REAL UNIVERSE IS NOT MATHEMATICAL a fair reading and that you allow me to answer any objections you may leave in my comment box about it.

        Joe Fisher

          Wow, I am really running out of gas on this topic. You may have missed my point, though.

          There are two equal but complementary math representations for action; motion in space with the conjugates of dx and dp and evolution in time with conjugates dt and dm for changes in time and matter.

          It is really only math that allows us to consider these two representations of physical reality. While spacetime is a huge mostly empty universe filled with a few objects of matter, matter time is a universe of time that is nearly filled with the possibilities of objects of matter.

          So far, using space and momentum, it has not been possible to unite gravity and charge forces since the path integrals between GR and QM are so different. By doing path integrals with just matter and time, it is now possible to unite gravity and charge forces. This is because there is an expectation value for proper time.